I have read posts here where people complain about having to look up results from tables and would rather have DCCrpg utilize cards. IMHO the quickest way to kill the old school feel that DCCrpg is supposed to have is by having cards. This is not 4th edition, not even close. Learn to read tables! Thanks

Agree here. If you want to make up your own cards thats great. But thats it let the decision to do that be an individuals.

My over all impression of DCC is that it encourages a GM to make his her own campaign again with its own house rules. Less official rules make us DM's THINK of what makes Our own personal game work better for us.

+d14My over all impression of DCC is that it encourages a GM to make his her own campaign again with its own house rules. Less official rules make us DM's THINK of what makes Our own personal game work better for us.

My over all impression of DCC is that it encourages a GM to make his her own campaign again with its own house rules. Less official rules make us DM's THINK of what makes Our own personal game work better for us.

Sometimes, reading comments on DCC RPG makes me realize things that I'm doing deliberately but unconsciously. This is exactly one of them - your comment hit the nail on the head! I personally believe house rules are a part of the game, and frankly we're all experienced GMs who are going to modify some percentage of the rules anyway to suit our longstanding habits of play. I've been writing it under the assumption that GMs would "fill in the gaps" with their house rules. But I hadn't expressed that quite so clearly. Thanks for the good encapsulation of this part of the game!

You've mentioned that there may be "optional" rules towards the end of the book. My suggestion is that instead you make this explicit and then use that space to give examples of modifying the game for your home campaign. Incorporate those optional rules into the various examples. That way you plant the seed for them, but also have a chance to talk about why a game may incorporate them and give DMs hints about how to do so effectively.

My over all impression of DCC is that it encourages a GM to make his her own campaign again with its own house rules. Less official rules make us DM's THINK of what makes Our own personal game work better for us.

That for me captures OD&D/1st ed feel better than anything.

I missed this the first time around, but it's worth commening upon.

To me, the whole OD&D sprit has always been about taking a basic rules set and making it my own. I can decide which classes to allow, which races are open, which rules get used. The rulebook is a guide and I get to make the final say.

I see DCC in the same light. Having rules for extra things I might not use isn't a problem. Having holes for me to fill is okay as well. My thought is that the only group who would really have issue with this are the 'rules lawyer' type players who point to a rulebook and say, "but it says here..."

I would also advocate having a (small) section devoted to philsophy and explaining that the rules are guidelines but the Game Master gets the final say. I think that this is already a part of the rules, but if others think that more is needed I would have no problem with it.

"The worthy GM never purposely kills players' PCs, He presents opportunities for the rash and unthinking players to do that all on their own." -- Gary Gygax"Don't ask me what you need to hit. Just roll the die and I will let you know!" -- Dave Arneson

To me, the whole OD&D sprit has always been about taking a basic rules set and making it my own. I can decide which classes to allow, which races are open, which rules get used. The rulebook is a guide and I get to make the final say.

I see DCC in the same light. Having rules for extra things I might not use isn't a problem. Having holes for me to fill is okay as well. My thought is that the only group who would really have issue with this are the 'rules lawyer' type players who point to a rulebook and say, "but it says here..."

I would also advocate having a (small) section devoted to philsophy and explaining that the rules are guidelines but the Game Master gets the final say. I think that this is already a part of the rules, but if others think that more is needed I would have no problem with it.

One thing I like out of a rules-set is a go-to sort-of mechanic that helps with odd situations that come up where no rule applies. Like in FASERIP, I can say "roll on Endurance, you need a Yellow Result".

The d20 system kinda, sorta had this. With the caveat that the DCs seemed to climb with character bonuses -- making high bonuses pretty, much negligible. This is REALLY exacerbated in 4e, IMO.

But that's one reason I like C&C so much. The SIEGE checks are just nice. Not too restrictive. Just there when needed. DCC sorta has this too. I wish there was a little more to it. But what's there is good enough, IMO. I do like that the DCs are static. I had a more involved attribute-based system that I was looking to use in a D&D-based game. Maybe it'll make it in as an option in the thing I'm putting together. It's not complex. Not at all. No more, less difficult than SIEGE checks. But it does give more precedence to the player's attribute scores. And there's a little more granularity there. So I think the mechanic would have more replayability than the typical d20 check.

I do play and love 4E but then I play and love just about every rpg at one time or another. RPG's are like peoples kids. The creators love them and often don't see the bad qualities but instead are enthralled with the good. That's ok! The Good qualities are often enough!

From real simple and perhaps a little silly like T&T to Pathfinders 50 pound core book each game offers not only a fun time playing with friends and family but a chance to glimpse the creators love for our hobby.

With 4E we pull out the battle maps and miniatures (even the half melted ones in the back and all three jars of colored glass beads we use for monsters we don't have. Of late we add the paper circle monster figures to it when we think of it.) and have a great time marking critters and figuring out how the hell you can close burst 4 without cooking your fellow party members. Sure its a slower type game but the six hours or so are still filled with fun! a different sort of fun then with our DCC adventures to be sure! but fun anyway!

We have yet to have one character make 2nd level in DCC. Much like our Call of Cthulu games part of the fun seems to be retelling stories about how your characters died.

House rules are very good. Our group plays with a very small set of house rules.

Why?

Because we like to keep in shape for tourneys at Gen Con! So we try to keep to core rules for most of the game so we do not suffer too bad at tourneys...

To be honest, the main changes we make to the game are tweaks that do not affect tourney's. (i.e. experience, training, spell component costs, etc).

I am all for house rules and I do support them in a game. But if you have too many house rules in your game, then it becomes very difficult to bring in a new player into the game. This becomes especially true with DCC...

An example: We are playing DCC and here is a rule book for you to catch up the differences between 'regular' DnD and this very cool DCC RPG. Oh, BTW ... skip chapters 2, 5, 8, part of 9 and 13 and here are supplemental rules.

I would suggest that the DCC RPG promote some rule changes, but I would suggest putting guidelines into the 'house rule' section that the changes should be minor and mainly related to character setup. Do not try modifying the core mechanics of the game without some serious consideration on how it will affect game play.

I participated in the design of the revised cleric (either version 3 or 4). I saw a ton of posts on how people were going to change it this way and that. There was a great deal of thought put into trying to balance the number of power and success/failure rates. If you make some very innocent changes to that progression, you might start to skew things more than you realize.

The only reason I am making this statement is that I would like to see the DCC RPG shine out there. If someone plays a house ruled class change and gets a bad feeling from the game, then they will tell 20 friends to avoid DCC RPG.

Remember the adage... bad news (and reviews) travel farther and faster than the good reviews. Heck the DCC RPG has not even been released and there is more bad than good about it out there on the forums.

PS - I feel that so many things were house ruled in 1e and 2e, is that that some things were flat out broken in the game.

But that's one reason I like C&C so much. The SIEGE checks are just nice. Not too restrictive. Just there when needed. DCC sorta has this too.

Agreed. A nice, easy-to-remember rules mechanic in general is better for me than a whole mess of complex and different rules that I can't remember. The C&C SIEGE mechanic does fit that requirement quite well and, other than the large pile of spell result charts, DCC seems to have a similar feel to it.

"The worthy GM never purposely kills players' PCs, He presents opportunities for the rash and unthinking players to do that all on their own." -- Gary Gygax"Don't ask me what you need to hit. Just roll the die and I will let you know!" -- Dave Arneson

When I first read this post, I confess that I bristled a bit, so I waited a few days before responding. On the off chance that any of this is directed in my general vicinity... I'd like to say a few things in my defense.

Hamakto wrote:

...

An example: We are playing DCC and here is a rule book for you to catch up the differences between 'regular' DnD and this very cool DCC RPG. Oh, BTW ... skip chapters 2, 5, 8, part of 9 and 13 and here are supplemental rules.

I would suggest that the DCC RPG promote some rule changes, but I would suggest putting guidelines into the 'house rule' section that the changes should be minor and mainly related to character setup. Do not try modifying the core mechanics of the game without some serious consideration on how it will affect game play....

1. All the changes that I've made are no different than the kinds of things that any DM with an established game world is going to do... for a campaign style game where the PC's will be moving through a world that is alive and vibrant. If I'd been running a "one night special" where the world outside the dungeon is irrelevant, then 90% of the stuff I've added in would not be needed; or presented to the players. Besides, I don't hold the players accountable for information coming from the "world supplement" data I've generated; this is the reason I usually stash a Bard in the Group. So they have someone to readily answer such questions, and to give me a direct voice to the characters. With Ducasters help we came up with a functional Bard class so that I could perform this otherwise simple function.

2. Of the rules that I've created for spotting, lifting, etc. those are IMO vital to the function of any RPG. When DCC RPG threw out a developed skill system they also lost some of the mechanics necessary for characters to function within and otherwise manipulate the game environment. I confess I took the opportunity to test some of the radical ideas that I've had over the years, but I don't feel that I've done anything to grossly misrepresent the DCC RPG System. Everything I've written has been subject to player approval; meaning, that if they didn't like something or weren't interested, they were given the option to ignore the material.

Quote:

The only reason I am making this statement is that I would like to see the DCC RPG shine out there. If someone plays a house ruled class change and gets a bad feeling from the game, then they will tell 20 friends to avoid DCC RPG.

Remember the adage... bad news (and reviews) travel farther and faster than the good reviews. Heck the DCC RPG has not even been released and there is more bad than good about it out there on the forums.

...

3. As for this last part... I can honestly say that the reason one of my players stormed off had more to do with his severe lack of interpersonal & communication skills; not the game itself. For the entirety of my game I've avoided commenting on the players and have been focusing on their characters actions, and the players questions, and ideas. There is a reason that you don't see a trail of deeds for Milo, Balinor, and Thingerlun... their player sat there at the table like a lump. In spite of coaching from me and the other players he simply couldn't grasp even the basics of the DCC System. He never even got to the stuff I added in... at least not as far as I could tell.

This is also the same player that would wait for his turn in the initiative to arrive and then stand up to go to the bathroom and then go out for a smoke. When he did take his actions it could take him 10 to 20 minutes for each... When the characters of Pat and Bob were trying to sneak their way onto the mining plateau and check for guards and such. Balinor and Milo came out from there hiding spot and started shouting questions at them...

Each time something like this would happen he'd blame it on the fact that he's mentally disabled. I believe him and we all did our very best to accommodate his needs. As a disabled person myself, I have the utmost sympathy for him and his problems, but there is only so much I and the group can do. What was really irksome was that after all we did to accommodate his needs, one of his charges against us was that we didn't care about him or his characters.

As for the complexities of running 3 characters... yah, he was probably overwhelmed, but he wouldn't let me kill them off either. Whats more, even after everything I wrote up for his PC's he actually complained that I hadn't done enough! Just because I told him I wasn't interested in doing much with Dwarves at the moment... he wasn't even using the stuff I'd already provided, and I have 3 other players who are quite interested in moving forward with the game.

I do apologize for any bad press he may generate, but I can't please everybody.

---PS: Hamakto> I think the reworked Cleric class is awesome! Props to you and the rest of the team. I admit our group was a bit sluggish in implementing it, but we like it. BTW- since my evil clerics are dedicated to Gods that have no interest in healing, I co-opted the lay on hands mechanic and gave them the ability to cause disease or cause corruptions/curses on a successful touch attack.

When I first read this post, I confess that I bristled a bit, so I waited a few days before responding. On the off chance that any of this is directed in my general vicinity... I'd like to say a few things in my defense.

Unless I've somehow missed some undercurrents here, I don't think this was aimed at you. Many people have offered suggestions of ways to make DCC run faster at the table. Cards, GM screens, and the like are all tools used to make this happen.

The place where I see "rules bloat" here is basically the spell tables and monster listings -- other aspects of the game tend to be pretty quick and easy to remember most of the time, or things that can be summorized in some short charts on a GM screen. Monster listings happen in most RPGs, so it's the spell charts that seem to most have folks troubled. Cards are a great solution for this, and the comparrison to 4E is a little unfair. AD&D 2E sold boxes of spell cards in the 1990's, so it's not like this is a new thing.

"The worthy GM never purposely kills players' PCs, He presents opportunities for the rash and unthinking players to do that all on their own." -- Gary Gygax"Don't ask me what you need to hit. Just roll the die and I will let you know!" -- Dave Arneson

I would suggest that the DCC RPG promote some rule changes, but I would suggest putting guidelines into the 'house rule' section that the changes should be minor and mainly related to character setup. Do not try modifying the core mechanics of the game without some serious consideration on how it will affect game play.

At the risk of offending you, I'd like to suggest that this statement is a bad idea. I agree with what you are saying, but if it's stated as a heavy-handed thing I suspect it will just annoy potential customers.

What I'm thinking is this:1. Most RPGs have been playtested and are properly balanced.2. Many gamers don't care and want to tinker anyway.3. If you tell them not to tinker, gamers will either ignore your warning or get a bad feeling about the way you said it.

My son likes to play Assassins. Most games say "Assassins get to do sneaky stuff, so we'll balance by taking away a little of the combat stuff." My son hates the Assassins found in RPGs because he wants both sneaky and combat stuff. I suspect that most gamers who tinker don't care a bit about game balance but instead want to focus on "realism" or their concept of what "should be" or ways to make their favorite choices even better.

I'm not sure about the problem with folks playing a house-ruled version of DCC and drawing conclusions about the game based on the house rules. Other games have similar issues and somehow seem to survive it. I think that DCC will be strong based on its artwork, its philosophy, and the way it plays. Haters will always find something to whine about. I guess I prefer a philosophy saying "here's some cool rules, so have fun with them!"

Again, I agree with all you said. Except that the statement should be in the rules.

"The worthy GM never purposely kills players' PCs, He presents opportunities for the rash and unthinking players to do that all on their own." -- Gary Gygax"Don't ask me what you need to hit. Just roll the die and I will let you know!" -- Dave Arneson

I think the philosophy is (I am probably wrong) that by keeping it simple, players and DMs can house rule what they want. I realize we are in a playtesting forum but I always could not stand when a rule of a game got changed due to people whining about it. And I also think it is unfair to draw parallels to 4th edition if someone wants to use cards as aids. The spell cards in second edition were a life saver for both player and DM. I personally liked the encounter cards too. Stay true Mr Goodman you have an excellent product thus far!

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum